Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-11-2010, 04:10 AM   #1
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2010
Location: melbourne
Posts: 934
Mint "complete set" m42 smc takumars becoming harder to find..and expensive.

I've been looking for a few lenses lately, of the M42 SMC variety, & despite "energetic" searching, I am finding that these lenses in MINT condition, are becoming more & more desirable, to more & more people......hense they are becoming.....more & more expensive.
The fact that more & more "enthusiasts" are "discovering" the magnificent quality of these lens' & fitting them to digital cameras is exacerbating the issue.
Recently, on Evilbay, I was outbid at $300 on a SMC M42 105 2.8 at $300. It was complete with case, caps, & Hood.
Individual M42 lenses are seemingly worth more, than things like Nikon F4/5 bodies, that were worth thousands of dollars, only a few years ago!
Is this trend going to continue, & if so, what will seemingly "popular"lenses like the SMC 85 1.8 be worth in a few years, if it does continue!?
Any thoughts?
Cheers, Pickles.

07-11-2010, 04:26 AM   #2
Pentaxian
ducdao's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Montreal/Vermont
Posts: 2,160
QuoteOriginally posted by pickles Quote
I've been looking for a few lenses lately, of the M42 SMC variety, & despite "energetic" searching, I am finding that these lenses in MINT condition, are becoming more & more desirable, to more & more people......hense they are becoming.....more & more expensive.
The fact that more & more "enthusiasts" are "discovering" the magnificent quality of these lens' & fitting them to digital cameras is exacerbating the issue.
Recently, on Evilbay, I was outbid at $300 on a SMC M42 105 2.8 at $300. It was complete with case, caps, & Hood.
Individual M42 lenses are seemingly worth more, than things like Nikon F4/5 bodies, that were worth thousands of dollars, only a few years ago!
Is this trend going to continue, & if so, what will seemingly "popular"lenses like the SMC 85 1.8 be worth in a few years, if it does continue!?
Any thoughts?
Cheers, Pickles.
Prices for Pentax & Takumar lenses have gone through the roof lately and I can't see that trend stops anytime soon
07-11-2010, 08:57 AM   #3
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
Its not helping the issue that people are putting them on off-brands such as Canon, Nikon, and Oly.
07-11-2010, 09:39 AM   #4
Site Supporter
gofour3's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 5,343
QuoteOriginally posted by pickles Quote
I've been looking for a few lenses lately, of the M42 SMC variety, & despite "energetic" searching, I am finding that these lenses in MINT condition, are becoming more & more desirable, to more & more people......hense they are becoming.....more & more expensive.
The fact that more & more "enthusiasts" are "discovering" the magnificent quality of these lens' & fitting them to digital cameras is exacerbating the issue.
Recently, on Evilbay, I was outbid at $300 on a SMC M42 105 2.8 at $300. It was complete with case, caps, & Hood.
Individual M42 lenses are seemingly worth more, than things like Nikon F4/5 bodies, that were worth thousands of dollars, only a few years ago!
Is this trend going to continue, & if so, what will seemingly "popular"lenses like the SMC 85 1.8 be worth in a few years, if it does continue!?
Any thoughts?
Cheers, Pickles.
It’s the same for the “K” series lenses, which I collect. (Basically just a k-mount update of the M42 SMC Taks) Both series are so well built, that they hold their value and command higher prices.

Phil.

07-11-2010, 09:52 AM   #5
Ira
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Coral Springs, FL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,216
$300 for the 105 is high at THIS point, even for the Super Multi Coated. Yeah, prices are going nuts, but you can still get lucky.

I got an m42 S-M-C 200 4 for 60 bucks a few weeks ago. But recently paid $240--yes, $240-- for a Super T 35 2.

I have my heart set on an S-Tak 17 fisheye (hardly a fisheye on an APS-C), and I expect to be lucky to find one for between $400 and $500.
07-11-2010, 10:00 AM   #6
emr
Guest




Do you folks really think that the Takumars are worth the price today? Naturally they're built like tanks, but is the IQ that good? I suspect that they became first popular because they were cheap, and since they became popular, the price went up and they aren't really that cheap anymore.

I don't really have experience with Taks, so I'm asking and not insisting that's the case. My only Tak's a unused-looking 50mm 1:1 Macro-Takumar which I don't really use since I find the preset thing unpractical.
07-11-2010, 10:33 AM   #7
Ira
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Coral Springs, FL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,216
QuoteOriginally posted by emr Quote
Do you folks really think that the Takumars are worth the price today? Naturally they're built like tanks, but is the IQ that good? I suspect that they became first popular because they were cheap, and since they became popular, the price went up and they aren't really that cheap anymore.

I don't really have experience with Taks, so I'm asking and not insisting that's the case. My only Tak's a unused-looking 50mm 1:1 Macro-Takumar which I don't really use since I find the preset thing unpractical.
Spend some time at The Takumar Club and make your own judgment.

Also, 99.9% of the Taks we're talking about aren't preset, but preset is not impractical at all. So give that lens the shooting time it deserves.

If you know you want to shoot at F8, for example, a preset is no different than any other manually metering lens. Just keep both rings at F8, or push the stop-down button, depending on the design.
07-11-2010, 12:27 PM - 1 Like   #8
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by gofour3 Quote
It’s the same for the “K” series lenses, which I collect. (Basically just a k-mount update of the M42 SMC Taks) Both series are so well built, that they hold their value and command higher prices.

Phil.
Phill, I want to try to clear discuss something that can be frustrating for collectors, especially new ones. Its inaccurate to say that "k" series lenses are k-mount updates to m42 SMC Taks. There were only a few of the S-M-C taks that were updated to the SMC Taks and some of the S-M-C Taks skipped to K and some didn't.

Lets compare 12 ultra-wide and wide-angle K to Tak lenses which excludes the K 8.4mm/2.8 fisheye (never went into production) and the K 28mm shift lens. 7 of the 12 never shared optical formulae with any Taks.

For example, the K 28mm/3.5 didn't exist as a Tak even though there were several Super Tak and S-M-C 28mm/3.5 Tak models (except there was no SMC Tak 28). The K 28/2 didn't exist as a Tak. There was never a 30mm Tak much less a f2.8 wide-angle Tak. The K 18mm was never produced as any version of a Tak. The K20mm/4 was different than the S-M-C Tak 20mm/4.5.

K35mm f2 is analogous to the S-M-C Tak 35mm f2 but skipped over a SMC Tak version. Likewise the S-M-C Tak 35mm f3.5 skipped over the SMC Tak version to the K 35mm f3.5.

The SMC Tak 15mm f3.5 was one of the last Tak designs Pentax released and came out in 1975 so it probably was designed parallel with its K sibling. (The 15mm/3.5 AL lens was never produced in m42). The S-M-C Tak 24mm/3.5 skipped over an SMC version to the K 24mm/3.5 but there was never a Tak analogue to the K 24mm/2.8

Here this is summarized in tables

K Wide-Angles that didn't share optical formula with any tak
k 15mm/3.5 AL
K 18mm/3.5
k 20mm/4
k 24mm/2.8
K 28mm/3.5
K 28mm/2
K 30mm/2.8

K Wide-angles that shared formulae with an S-M-C Tak but not an SMC
K 17mm/4
K 24mm/3.5

K Wide-angles that shared formulae with an SMC Tak
K 15mm/3.5

This evens out some in the Normal lens range. However, over the ultra-wide, wide, normal and tele focal lengths, I'd guess that roughly half of the K lens do not share formulae with Taks. Plus, there wasn't that many SMC Taks to begin with so when the K lenses do share formulae, it is usually with an S-M-C lens.

As far as the normal and tele focal length lenses go, the K 50mm/1.2 and K 200mm/2.5 had no peers in the Takumar world.

07-11-2010, 06:52 PM   #9
Site Supporter
gofour3's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 5,343
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
Phill, I want to try to clear discuss something that can be frustrating for collectors, especially new ones. Its inaccurate to say that "k" series lenses are k-mount updates to m42 SMC Taks. There were only a few of the S-M-C taks that were updated to the SMC Taks and some of the S-M-C Taks skipped to K and some didn't.

Lets compare 12 ultra-wide and wide-angle K to Tak lenses which excludes the K 8.4mm/2.8 fisheye (never went into production) and the K 28mm shift lens. 7 of the 12 never shared optical formulae with any Taks.

For example, the K 28mm/3.5 didn't exist as a Tak even though there were several Super Tak and S-M-C 28mm/3.5 Tak models (except there was no SMC Tak 28). The K 28/2 didn't exist as a Tak. There was never a 30mm Tak much less a f2.8 wide-angle Tak. The K 18mm was never produced as any version of a Tak. The K20mm/4 was different than the S-M-C Tak 20mm/4.5.

K35mm f2 is analogous to the S-M-C Tak 35mm f2 but skipped over a SMC Tak version. Likewise the S-M-C Tak 35mm f3.5 skipped over the SMC Tak version to the K 35mm f3.5.

The SMC Tak 15mm f3.5 was one of the last Tak designs Pentax released and came out in 1975 so it probably was designed parallel with its K sibling. (The 15mm/3.5 AL lens was never produced in m42). The S-M-C Tak 24mm/3.5 skipped over an SMC version to the K 24mm/3.5 but there was never a Tak analogue to the K 24mm/2.8

Here this is summarized in tables

K Wide-Angles that didn't share optical formula with any tak
k 15mm/3.5 AL
K 18mm/3.5
k 20mm/4
k 24mm/2.8
K 28mm/3.5
K 28mm/2
K 30mm/2.8

K Wide-angles that shared formulae with an S-M-C Tak but not an SMC
K 17mm/4
K 24mm/3.5

K Wide-angles that shared formulae with an SMC Tak
K 15mm/3.5

This evens out some in the Normal lens range. However, over the ultra-wide, wide, normal and tele focal lengths, I'd guess that roughly half of the K lens do not share formulae with Taks. Plus, there wasn't that many SMC Taks to begin with so when the K lenses do share formulae, it is usually with an S-M-C lens.

As far as the normal and tele focal length lenses go, the K 50mm/1.2 and K 200mm/2.5 had no peers in the Takumar world.
Yes agreed, I was making a generalized statement on the 26 original mid 1975 “K” Series releases:

K17/4 Fish-eye
K15/3.5
K20/4
K24/3.5
K28/3.5
K35/2
K35/3.5
K50/1.2
K50/1.4
K55/1.8
K85/1.8
K105/2.8
K120/2.8
K135/2.5
K135/3.5
K150/4
K200/4
K300/4
K400/5.6
K500/4.5
K1000/8
K45-125/4 Zoom
K85-210/4.5 Zoom
K135-600/6.7 Zoom
K50/4 Macro
K100/4 Macro

The rest of the K series were released later on, some existed in the M42 world (K55/2, K100/4 Bellows) others as you mentioned did not (K28/3.5 Shift, K200/2.5, K28/2……)

It’s more than a coincidence that all but two of the original Ks (K20/4 & K50/1.2) were also available in mid 1975 as an M42 mount. Yes I realize the SMC coatings, optics, filter size and minimum aperture were not exactly the same; however the Ks were also not brand new lens designs. (K50/1.2 was the only one) Even the K20/4 has similarities to the SMC Tak 20/4.5.

Same is true for the film bodies; the KM has more than a passing resemblance to a Spotmatic of the same era.

Pentax did not reinvent the wheel when they released the “K” series in 1975, they just “massaged” existing designs, some more than others. I still do a double take when I see the late model SMC Taks and SMC Ks together, they are more than similar.

Phil.
07-11-2010, 08:39 PM   #10
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
The point I was making is that there are about as many "k" lenses that don't share optical formula with one of the Taks as there are ones that do.

QuoteOriginally posted by gofour3 Quote
Yes agreed, I was making a generalized statement on the 26 original mid 1975 “K” Series releases:

K17/4 Fish-eye
K15/3.5
K20/4 actually has 12/10 compared to 11/10 for the S-M-C tak.
K24/3.5
K28/3.5 actually, this had 8/7 compared to 7/7 for the S-M-C Tak 28mm 3.5.
K35/2
K35/3.5
K50/1.2 There was never a SMC or any other 50mm f1.2 Tak
K50/1.4
K55/1.8
K85/1.8
K105/2.8
K120/2.8
K135/2.5
K135/3.5
K150/4
K200/4
K300/4
K400/5.6
K500/4.5
K1000/8
K45-125/4 Zoom
K85-210/4.5 Zoom
K135-600/6.7 Zoom
K50/4 Macro
K100/4 Macro
QuoteOriginally posted by gofour3 Quote
The rest of the K series were released later on, some existed in the M42 world (K55/2, K100/4 Bellows) others as you mentioned did not (K28/3.5 Shift, K200/2.5, K28/2……)

It’s more than a coincidence that all but two of the original Ks (K20/4 & K50/1.2) were also available in mid 1975 as an M42 mount. Yes I realize the SMC coatings, optics, filter size and minimum aperture were not exactly the same; however the Ks were also not brand new lens designs. (K50/1.2 was the only one) Even the K20/4 has similarities to the SMC Tak 20/4.5.
Actually, there wasn't an SMC tak 20mm f4.5, it was an S-M-C which had 11 elements in 10 groups and the K had 12 elements in 10 groups. Plus it had

QuoteOriginally posted by gofour3 Quote
Same is true for the film bodies; the KM has more than a passing resemblance to a Spotmatic of the same era.

Pentax did not reinvent the wheel when they released the “K” series in 1975, they just “massaged” existing designs, some more than others. I still do a double take when I see the late model SMC Taks and SMC Ks together, they are more than similar.

Phil.
The K2 is a lot like an ES II but with a stepless metal shutter and mirror lockup. The metal shutter debuted at 1966 Photokina in the Metallica II even thought the electronic controlled aperture priority showed up in 1971 on the ES but with a fabric stepless shutter. The KX is similar to the Spot F with mlu. I suspect that the SMC lenses were done in parallel with the "k" lenses.
07-11-2010, 08:49 PM   #11
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
The reason this matters to me regarding the Taks and "k" series is that since I collect Taks, I look for the "k" lenses that are different.
07-11-2010, 10:00 PM   #12
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2010
Location: melbourne
Posts: 934
Original Poster
Gofour & Blue....Awesome knowledge there. As I've said before, Van Oosten's book is pretty good, but I'm sure even he would be impressed with that sort of knowledge.
As the originator of this thread, the other point I would make, is that whilst the particular category of lens that I am interested in (Genuine Pentax Super Multi Coated M42....last before bayonet mount!), have seen massive price increases, the really big prices are for the mint items.
"Ordinary" used items...still in good nick for sure, good optics, but showing signs of use, wear, a bit of paint loss etc, can still be picked up quite cheaply...in fact on Ebay they sometimes don't even attract a bid.
I guess what I'm saying is that there can be an enormous difference in price relative to condition.
Cheers, Pickles.
07-12-2010, 06:51 AM   #13
Forum Member




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 70
Pickles, I found a spotmatic with SMC Takumar f2 55mm for $5 in Melbourne today at a Salvos store, the lens looks almost brand new. I know it's not one of the highly sought after lenses but I'm taking it as a sign to keep looking , and I'm pleased to have it as my first addition to my kit lenses. f2 sounds fast to me
07-12-2010, 08:51 AM   #14
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by kangamel Quote
Pickles, I found a spotmatic with SMC Takumar f2 55mm for $5 in Melbourne today at a Salvos store, the lens looks almost brand new. I know it's not one of the highly sought after lenses but I'm taking it as a sign to keep looking , and I'm pleased to have it as my first addition to my kit lenses. f2 sounds fast to me
Was that a Spotmatic F? The S-M-C and SMC lenses were designed to support open aperture metering on the Electro Spotmatic, ES, ES II and Spot F bodies. The 55mm f2 is exactly the same optically as its f1.8 counterparts.
07-13-2010, 04:26 AM   #15
Forum Member




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 70
Blue, its a spotmatic with SP under the serial number ( part no 23102). I know that the lens is not the original one for this camera as its younger. Took it into my local camera shop today and the 'Pentax guy' who works there confirmd the lens is in great condition. The camera is missing the top piece on the film winder, but $5 hey.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
lenses, m42, mint, smc
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
People "Glamour" Modelling Set Intric8 Post Your Photos! 11 07-20-2010 10:50 PM
"Glamour" Modelling Set Intric8 Photographic Technique 0 06-07-2010 07:30 PM
For Sale - Sold: [SOLD]SMC PENTAX "K" 1:3.5/28mm (Hard to Find) Curbster54 Sold Items 7 02-26-2010 03:53 PM
"Hunger for a DA*50-135?" or "The DA*50-135 as a bird lens!" or "Iron age birds?" Douglas_of_Sweden Post Your Photos! 4 08-13-2008 06:09 AM
For Sale - Sold: FS: Kenko Extension Tube Set with "A" Contacts GaryML Sold Items 3 03-21-2007 12:33 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:16 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top